Question for Palestinians.

[stevecanuck]

Have the last 77 years been worth it?

In 1947 the UN passed resolution 181 calling for the formation of two countries - Israel and Palestine. It also recommended that they be joined economically, which would have greatly benefited Palestinians. Israel agreed to the borders, but the Palestinians rejected it out of hand. Palestine had been part of one empire or another for over 3 thousand years, yet they turned the offer of independence down without even considering it, and instead stepped up terrorist attacks against Jewish settlements (all of which at that time were on legally purchased land). Perhaps the Palestinian allotment was less than desired, but negotiating a better deal was never considered. Their rejection of 181 and the resulting war in which Israel was attacked by eight Arab nations created the refugee crisis that plagues Palestinians to this day, with no end in sight. Palestinians traded independence for never-ending war and displacement. The phrase 'Palestinian refugee' never had to exist.

International aid to Palestine, for just one example, went to building terrorist tunnels under a hospital rather than to buying a backup generator for it. Palestians in Gaza and the West Bank were under Egyptian and Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, yet they kept Palestinians in camps as propaganda fodder rather than create self-rule zones for them. Has all the death, displacement, and misery been worth it? And if so, how?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah, like there's any Palestinians on this board.

This is just victim blaming garbage, anyway.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Has all the death, displacement, and misery been worth it? And if so, how?

I tend to agree with @Saint Frankenstein. How is this question helpful or even relevant?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Have the last 77 years been worth it?

In 1947 the UN passed resolution 181 calling for the formation of two countries - Israel and Palestine. It also recommended that they be joined economically, which would have greatly benefited Palestinians. Israel agreed to the borders, but the Palestinians rejected it out of hand.

Boy, this sure is an odd way of framing the UN literally carving up land that belonged to people who had lived there for generations (with Jewish communities), without their consent.

"The UN took land that had been lived on for generations, told the people living there that it now belonged to these other people who would either demand they leave or else subject them to violence, and it turns out one side of this arrangement was happy with it while the other side was not."

Shocker. Surely, it's the fault of the Palestinians.

Palestine had been part of one empire or another for over 3 thousand years, yet they turned the offer of independence down without even considering it, and instead stepped up terrorist attacks against Jewish settlements (all of which at that time were on legally purchased land).

They didn't "turn down the offer of independence". They rejected an authority that they had absolutely no vote on carving up their land and giving it to other people. This is not a completely shocking and unexpected response. Of course there would be violent reprisals.

Perhaps the Palestinian allotment was less than desired, but negotiating a better deal was never considered.

It never could be. The land was taken, and Israel ALMOST IMMEDIATELY started posting armies outside of the allotted land and began seizing territory that wasn't included in the settlement plan, backed by significantly greater military force, and enacted a mass ethnic cleansing of the region.

Nakba - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Curious how you failed to mention that.

Their rejection of 181 and the resulting war in which Israel was attacked by eight Arab nations created the refugee crisis that plagues Palestinians to this day, with no end in sight.

See above. Somehow, you missed the YEARS OF ETHNIC CLEANSING in the region, and the ILLEGAL ANNEXING OF LAND.

Palestinians traded independence for never-ending war and displacement.

Let's imagine that we live in an alternative reality where this is undeniably true:

So what?

What does that have to do with how the Palestinian and Gazan civilians OF TODAY are being treated, and whether or not Israel's treatment of them is justified?

The phrase 'Palestinian refugee' never had to exist.

You're right. Israel could have not ethnically cleansed them, and could have stopped continually illegally seizing their land and ethnically cleansing them for the past 77 years.

International aid to Palestine, for just one example, went to building terrorist tunnels under a hospital rather than to buying a backup generator for it.

[citation needed]

Palestians in Gaza and the West Bank were under Egyptian and Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, yet they kept Palestinians in camps as propaganda fodder rather than create self-rule zones for them.

Which is also bad. When are you going to also address the much more pressing issue of Israel indiscriminately bombing civilians in the region?

Has all the death, displacement, and misery been worth it?

Maybe ask Israel. Or, better yet, stop blaming modern day civilians for the actions of political bodies and authorities from decades ago.

 

[icehorse]

Boy, this sure is an odd way of framing the UN literally carving up land that belonged to people who had lived there for generations (with Jewish communities), without their consent.

And the rest of your post...

It's so hard to get unbiased information on this topic. Your post provides many examples of heavily biased spin, sigh.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

And the rest of your post...

It's so hard to get unbiased information on this topic. Your post provides many examples of heavily biased spin, sigh.

Oh yeah?

Please explain in what ways my post was biased and in what ways it's characterisation was false.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Boy, this sure is an odd way of framing the UN literally carving up land that belonged to people who had lived there for generations (with Jewish communities), without their consent.

I'd be curious to know what peer reviewed studies you've draw upon to discuss "land that belonged to people who had lived there for generations." What, for example, did it mean for land to belong to people in the wake of the Turkish War of Independence and a regime known, in part, for its ethnic cleansing?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I'd be curious to know what peer reviewed studies you've draw upon to discuss "land that belonged to people who had lived there for generations." What, for example, did it mean for land to belong to people in the wake of the Turkish War of Independence and a regime known, in part, for its ethnic cleansing?

"Belong" might not be the best term to use, but you certainly cannot simply ignore that there were people living on the land for generations. I would say the land "belonged" to those groups in a far more legitimate way than it belonged to some other group who hadn't been living there purely by technical mandate, however. Also, in case anyone suspects: no, I am not dividing these groups along racial or ethnic lines. I'm referring to both the Arabs and Jews and other groups who had lived there.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

"Belong" might not be the best term to use, but you certainly cannot simply ignore that there were people living on the land for generations.

I agree.

 

[sayak83]

Have the last 77 years been worth it?

In 1947 the UN passed resolution 181 calling for the formation of two countries - Israel and Palestine. It also recommended that they be joined economically, which would have greatly benefited Palestinians. Israel agreed to the borders, but the Palestinians rejected it out of hand. Palestine had been part of one empire or another for over 3 thousand years, yet they turned the offer of independence down without even considering it, and instead stepped up terrorist attacks against Jewish settlements (all of which at that time were on legally purchased land). Perhaps the Palestinian allotment was less than desired, but negotiating a better deal was never considered. Their rejection of 181 and the resulting war in which Israel was attacked by eight Arab nations created the refugee crisis that plagues Palestinians to this day, with no end in sight. Palestinians traded independence for never-ending war and displacement. The phrase 'Palestinian refugee' never had to exist.

International aid to Palestine, for just one example, went to building terrorist tunnels under a hospital rather than to buying a backup generator for it. Palestians in Gaza and the West Bank were under Egyptian and Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, yet they kept Palestinians in camps as propaganda fodder rather than create self-rule zones for them. Has all the death, displacement, and misery been worth it? And if so, how?

I do not think Israel will exist as a state at the end of 21st century. Let's face it, West is a declining power and the fulcrum of power will shift to Asia, Middle East and Africa inevitably. Once oil goes away, the West will anyways lose all interest in Middle East. Israel has failed to make any friends in its neighborhood. My sense of history suggest that the State of Israel will fall just like that Crusader Kingdoms fell. I do not want this to happen. But Israel's policies seem to be suicidal right now.

 

[Watchmen]

Yeah, like there's any Palestinians on this board.

This is just victim blaming garbage, anyway.

Why wouldn’t there be any Palestinians here? You do realize they’re not all in Gaza, right? I have a wonderful employee who happens to be Palestinian and wears her Free Palestine sweatshirt to work every week. She might participate in a board such as this.

 

[Kathryn]

I keep thinking about native Americans.

 

[Kathryn]

Why wouldn’t there be any Palestinians here? You do realize they’re not all in Gaza, right? I have a wonderful employee who happens to be Palestinian and wears her Free Palestine sweatshirt to work every week. She might participate in a board such as this.

I know several Palestinian Muslims in the US. I used to work with one in fact, and her husband (also a Palestinian and Muslim) worked with a local television station. They seem like they could also be on this board.

 

[England my lionheart]

I do not think Israel will exist as a state at the end of 21st century. Let's face it, West is a declining power and the fulcrum of power will shift to Asia, Middle East and Africa inevitably. Once oil goes away, the West will anyways lose all interest in Middle East. Israel has failed to make any friends in its neighborhood. My sense of history suggest that the State of Israel will fall just like that Crusader Kingdoms fell. I do not want this to happen. But Israel's policies seem to be suicidal right now.

Lol thats funny " Israel has failed to make any friends in its neighborhood".

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Israel has failed to make any friends in its neighborhood.

Most of the Arab countries between the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and the Persian gulf have either already established ties with Israel, or are on the verge of it. You see, everyone is scared to death of Iran, and the enemy of enemy is my friend.